EXPLANATORY STATEMENT
Tariff Concessions Revocation Instrument 31/2007
Customs Act 1901
Background
Part XVA of the Customs Act 1901 (the Act) sets out a scheme under which Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs) may be made and revoked by the Chief Executive Officer of Customs (the CEO). A lower rate of customs duty applies to goods that are the subject of a TCO.
Under sections 269C and 269P of the Act, a TCO will be made if the application for the TCO meets the core criteria, that is, on the day on which the application was lodged, no substitutable goods were produced in Australia in the ordinary course of business.
Section 269SB of the Act provides, in part, that a person claiming to be a producer in Australia of substitutable goods in relation to the goods covered by a TCO may request the CEO to revoke the TCO.
Under subsections 269SC(1) and (3) of the Act, the CEO must make an order revoking the TCO if the CEO is satisfied:
− that, on the day of lodgement of the request, the person requesting the revocation of the TCO is a producer in Australia of goods that are substitutable goods in relation to the goods the subject of the TCO; and
− that, if the TCO were not in force on that day but that day were the day on which the application for that TCO was lodged, the CEO would not have made the TCO.
Huntsman Corporation Australia requested that the CEO revoke TCO 0508909 which covers butyl glycol.
Instrument
Tariff Concessions Revocation Instrument No 31/2007 was made on 8 February 2007. It revokes TCO 0508909 as the CEO is satisfied that Huntsman Corporation Australia is a producer in Australia of substitutable goods and that the CEO would not have made the TCO.
Consultation
Subsection 269SC(1A) of the Act provides that as soon as practicable after receiving a request for revocation of a TCO, the CEO must publish in a Gazette a notice which includes a statement that a request has been lodged and the full particulars of the TCO to which the request relates.
Commencement
Subsection 269SC(6) provides that an order revoking a TCO comes into force on the day on which the request to revoke the TCO was lodged. Subsection 239SD(8) provides, in part, that subsection 269SC(6) has effect despite section 12 of the Legislative Instruments Act 2003. Section 12 prohibits the making of certain retrospective legislative instruments.
Tariff Concessions Revocation Instrument No.31/2007 revoked 0508909 on 8 February 2007.
Overview
The Customs Act 1901, enacted by the Australian Parliament, governs various aspects of customs and border control, including the establishment and revocation of Tariff Concession Orders (TCOs). The Act was introduced to streamline and formalise the process of granting tariff concessions on imported goods, ensuring that such concessions are only awarded under specific conditions that protect local industries. The Tariff Concessions Revocation Instrument 31/2007, made on 8 February 2007, serves to revoke TCO 0508909 for butyl glycol following a request by Huntsman Corporation Australia, a domestic producer of substitutable goods. The revocation was carried out as the Chief Executive Officer of Customs was satisfied that Huntsman Corporation Australia qualified as a producer of substitutable goods and that the concession would not have been granted had the current circumstances been known at the time of application. This instrument underscores the Act’s objective of maintaining fair trade practices by ensuring that tariff concessions do not undermine domestic production.
Scope and Application
The Tariff Concessions Revocation Instrument No. 31/2007, made under the Customs Act 1901, revokes Tariff Concession Order (TCO) 0508909 which pertains to butyl glycol. This revocation was enacted in response to a request from Huntsman Corporation Australia, a producer of substitutable goods. The Act applies to any individual or entity seeking to revoke a TCO based on the production of substitutable goods in Australia. The geographic reach of the Act is national, as it is a Commonwealth statute, and applies across all states and territories in Australia. The Act provides a mechanism for revoking TCOs if certain criteria are met, ensuring that the concession does not apply if substitutable goods are already being produced domestically. The revocation is effective from the date the request was lodged, in line with the provisions of the Customs Act, and despite certain prohibitions on retrospective legislative instruments.
Key Provisions
The Tariff Concessions Revocation Instrument No 31/2007 revokes Tariff Concession Order (TCO) 0508909, which pertains to butyl glycol, following a request by Huntsman Corporation Australia. This revocation is in accordance with sections 269SB, 269SC(1), and 269SC(3) of the Customs Act 1901. The CEO of Customs made the decision to revoke the TCO after being satisfied that Huntsman Corporation Australia is a producer of substitutable goods in Australia and that, if the TCO were not in force on the day the request was made, the CEO would not have made the TCO in the first place. This revocation has the effect of reintroducing the standard customs duty on butyl glycol.
Under the Customs Act 1901, the CEO of Customs has specific obligations when considering a request to revoke a TCO. These include publishing a notice in a Gazette as soon as practicable after receiving a revocation request, detailing the request and the particulars of the TCO in question (section 269SC(1A)). Additionally, the CEO must ensure that the order to revoke a TCO comes into force on the day the revocation request was made, despite the prohibition on certain retrospective legislative instruments as outlined in the Legislative Instruments Act 2003 (sections 269SC(6) and 239SD(8)).
Failure to comply with the provisions of the Customs Act 1901 regarding the revocation of a TCO may lead to civil or criminal consequences. While the explanatory statement does not explicitly detail the specific penalties, breaches of the Customs Act can result in substantial fines or imprisonment, depending on the severity and intent of the breach. The maximum penalties can vary, but they are significant, reflecting the importance of adhering to customs regulations to maintain the integrity of the tariff system.